This week's healthy schools highlights

Denver public schools going for a ‘green’ star

If things continue on the same path, the Denver Public School system may be the greenest school district in the nation. Read more in the Examiner.

Poll: U.S. parents want kids more active during school day

A new poll finds that almost all parents of young children believe it’s important for elementary school kids to get exercise during each school day. However, one-third said their children don’t get enough physical activity at school. Read more in HealthDay News.

‘Renegade lunch lady’ Ann Cooper earns national honor

Fair labor practices in the organic berry industry, environmentally-responsible biopesticides, a new crop of young sustainable farming stewards in the Midwest, and a lunch food revolution in schools – these are the winning innovations receiving recognition today by the Natural Resources Defense Council’s third annual Growing Green Awards.

An independent panel of sustainable food experts selected the four winners from a pool of 265 candidates that included diverse growers, business leaders and activists across the country. The 2011 winners include EdNews Parent expert and Boulder Valley food services director Ann Cooper, who was named the 2011 Knowledge Leader winner.

Education news. In your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter

Education news.In your inbox.

Cooper started the Food Family Farming Foundation, which provides schools with the tools and guidance they need to transition from over-processed meals to healthy, fresh ingredients on a limited budget. Her day job is in the trenches of the Boulder Valley School District, where she is transforming lunch menus in the entire 48-school district, just as she has done before on the East and West coasts.

“I am so honored to receive this award not only for the work of the Food Family Farming Foundation, but on behalf of all the school food advocates and professionals across the country who are working toward better school food for all children,” said Cooper. “This award showcases the fact that nutritious food in schools is becoming mainstream, giving our children a brighter and healthier future.”

Greeley kids gain healthy dash of pride in cooking contest

GREELEY — The school cafeteria could have been a Food Network studio as four judges at a raised table tucked into their “Chic Penne” pasta Tuesday. This was the moment of truth for the eighth-grade culinary team that had labored over the dish for two months. Read more in the Denver Post.

Aurora Public Schools program provides healthy meals

Hundreds of elementary students in the Aurora Public Schools district will be greeted in their classrooms with a free breakfast this morning. Today, APS is launching “Breakfast in the Classroom,” a program aimed at providing nutritious meals at high poverty schools. Kitchen staffers at Elkhart and Sable elementary schools and Boston K-8 School will personally deliver free breakfast to students. Read more in Your Hub.

Survey: Have your say on sustainability

Funded by a grant from the Governor’s Energy Office, Denver Public Schools is in the process of developing its first ever Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) for its own operations. This SMP will identify ways the district can be a good environmental steward; save resources and money; and support staff and students by providing healthy, productive learning and work environments.

One of the key, first steps in developing the SMP is to hear from community members. DPS is conducting an online survey to collect feedback on what topics are most important to address in the SMP, what the district is already doing well, what it can do to improve and how you can participate in implementing the SMP.

The survey is open to all DPS stakeholders including staff, teachers, students, parents, district and school leaders and others. Click here to have your say. All responses will remain anonymous. Please complete the survey by no later than 5 p.m. Friday, May 6.

I’m a Bronx teacher, and I see up close what we all lose when undocumented students live with uncertainty

It was our high school’s first graduation ceremony. Students were laughing as they lined up in front of the auditorium, their families cheering them on as they entered. We were there to celebrate their accomplishments and their futures.

Next to each student’s name on the back of those 2013 graduation programs was the college the student planned to attend in the fall. Two names, however, had noticeable blanks next to them.

But I was especially proud of these two students, whom I’ll call Sofia and Isabella. These young women started high school as English learners and were diagnosed with learning disabilities. Despite these obstacles, I have never seen two students work so hard.

By the time they graduated, they had two of the highest grade point averages in their class. It would have made sense for them to be college-bound. But neither would go to college. Because of their undocumented status, they did not qualify for financial aid, and, without aid, they could not afford it.

Education news. In your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter

Education news.In your inbox.

During this year’s State of the Union, I listened to President Trump’s nativist rhetoric and I thought of my students and the thousands of others in New York City who are undocumented. President Trump falsely portrayed them as gang members and killers. The truth is, they came to this country before they even understood politics and borders. They grew up in the U.S. They worked hard in school. In this case, they graduated with honors. They want to be doctors and teachers. Why won’t we let them?

Instead, as Trump works to repeal President Obama’s broader efforts to enfranchise these young people, their futures are plagued by uncertainty and fear. A Supreme Court move just last week means that young people enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program remain protected but in limbo.

While Trump and the Congress continue to struggle to find compromise on immigration, we have a unique opportunity here in New York State to help Dreamers. Recently, the Governor Cuomo proposed and the state Assembly passed New York’s DREAM Act, which would allow Sofia, Isabella, and their undocumented peers to access financial aid and pursue higher education on equal footing with their documented peers. Republicans in the New York State Senate, however, have refused to take up this bill, arguing that New York state has to prioritize the needs of American-born middle-class families.

This argument baffles me. In high school, Sofia worked hard to excel in math and science in order to become a radiologist. Isabella was so passionate about becoming a special education teacher that she spent her free periods volunteering with students with severe disabilities at the school co-located in our building.

These young people are Americans. True, they may not have been born here, but they have grown up here and seek to build their futures here. They are integral members of our communities.

By not passing the DREAM Act, it feels like lawmakers have decided that some of the young people that graduate from my school do not deserve the opportunity to achieve their dreams. I applaud the governor’s leadership, in partnership with the New York Assembly, to support Dreamers like Sofia and Isabella and I urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their opposition to the bill.

Today, Sofia and Isabella have been forced to find low-wage jobs, and our community and our state are the poorer for it.

Ilona Nanay is a 10th grade global history teacher and wellness coordinator at Mott Hall V in the Bronx. She is also a member of Educators for Excellence – New York.

I was an attorney representing school districts in contract talks. Here’s why I hope the Supreme Court doesn’t weaken teachers unions.

Many so-called education reformers argue that collective bargaining — and unions — are obstacles to real change in education. It’s common to hear assertions about how “restrictive” contracts and “recalcitrant” unions put adult interests over children’s.

The underlying message: if union power were minimized and collective bargaining rights weakened or eliminated, school leaders would be able to enact sweeping changes that could disrupt public education’s status quo.

Those that subscribe to this view are eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. At issue is the constitutionality of “agency” or “fair share” fees — employee payroll deductions that go to local unions, meant to cover the costs of negotiating and implementing a bargaining agreement.

In states that permit agency fees (there are about 20), a teacher may decline to be part of a union but must still pay those fees. If the Supreme Court rules that those agency fees are unconstitutional, and many teachers do not voluntarily pay, local unions will be deprived of resources needed to negotiate and enforce bargaining agreements.

Education news. In your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter

Education news.In your inbox.

Based on my experience as an attorney representing school districts in bargaining and contract issues, I have this to say to those hoping the Court will strike down these fees: be careful what you wish for.

Eliminating fair share fees (and trying to weaken unions) represents a misguided assumption about bargaining — that the process weakens school quality. To the contrary, strong relationships with unions, built through negotiations, can help create the conditions for student and school success. Indeed, in my experience, the best superintendents and school boards seized bargaining as an opportunity to advance their agenda, and engaged unions as partners whenever possible.

Why, and how, can this work? For one, the process of negotiations provides a forum for school leaders and teachers to hear one another’s concerns and goals. In my experience, this is most effective in districts that adopt “interest-based bargaining,” which encourages problem-solving as starting point for discussions as opposed to viewing bargaining as a zero-sum game.

Interest-based bargaining begins with both sides listing their major concerns and brainstorming solutions. The touchstone for a solution to be adopted in a bargaining agreement: Is the proposal in the best interests of children? This important question, if embedded in the process, forces both sides to carefully consider their shared mission.

For example, some districts I worked with paid teachers less than comparable neighboring districts did. It would have been unreasonable for unions to insist that their pay be increased enough to even that difference out, because that would mean reducing investments in other items of importance to children, like technology or infrastructure. At the same time, it would have been untenable for management to play “hard ball” and deny the problem, because to do so would likely lead to a disgruntled workforce.

Education news. In your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter

email icon

Education news.In your inbox.

Email Address:

Select Edition:

Never miss a story. Like us on Facebook.

Education news. In your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter

email icon

Education news.In your inbox.

Email Address:

Select Edition:

Instead, both sides were forced to “own” the issue and collaboratively craft plausible solutions. That made unions more agreeable to proposals that demonstrated some commitment by the district to addressing the issue of pay, and districts open to other things that they could provide without breaking the budget (like more early release days for professional development).

To be sure, many school administrators could get frustrated with the process of bargaining or having to consult the negotiated agreement when they want to make a change. Some districts would very much like to adopt an extended school day, for example, but they know that they must first consult and negotiate such an idea with the union.

Yet, in districts where school administrators had built a reservoir of goodwill through collective bargaining, disagreement does not come at the cost of operating schools efficiently. Both sides come to recognize that while they inevitably will disagree on some things, they can also seek agreement — and often do on high-stakes matters, like teacher evaluations.

How does this relate to the Supreme Court’s pending decision? Without fees from some teachers, unions may lack the resources to ensure that contract negotiations and enforcement are robust and done well. This could create a vicious cycle: teachers who voluntarily pay fees for bargaining in a post-Janus world, assuming the court rules against the unions, will view such payments as not delivering any return on investment. In turn, they will stop contributing voluntarily, further degrading the quality of the union’s services.

Even more troubling, if fair share fees are prohibited, resentment and internal strife will arise between those who continue to pay the fees and those who refuse. This would undercut a primary benefit of bargaining — labor peace and a sense of shared purpose.

Speaking as a parent, this raises a serious concern: who wants to send their child to a school where there is an undercurrent of bitterness between teachers and administrators that will certainly carry over into the classroom?

It is easy to see the appeal of those opposing agency fees. No one wants to see more money going out of their paycheck. The union-as-bogeyman mentality is pervasive. Moreover, in my experience, some teachers (especially the newer ones) do not recognize the hidden benefits to bargaining contracts.

But, obvious or not, agency fees help promote a stable workplace that allows teachers to concentrate on their primary responsibility: their students. Removing the key ingredient threatens this balance.

Mark Paige is a former school teacher and school law attorney who represented school districts in New England. He is currently an associate professor of public policy at the University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth.